4 ms·

> the amount wagered on sports bets has grown from $5 billion to $150 billion annually. 58% of college students have bet on sports. 50% of all men below 50 have

> the amount wagered on sports bets has grown from $5 billion to $150 billion annually. 58% of college students have bet on sports. 50% of all men below 50 have an online sports betting account. If I had my way, everyone who has ever made a "why make it illegal/regulate it? People will just do it anyway."-style argument would be forced under penalty of law to write the above quote 300 times on a chalkboard.

decimalenough 1y ago
While I have no doubt sports betting is much more popular now, I presume the $5 billion figure does not capture the considerable amount of illegal betting that happened previously.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- jgalt212 1y ago
  If you wanted to bet on sports when I was in college you needed a bookie. Now, you have access to all the legal bookies in the world in your pocket. It's hard to make an argument that something that is now legal and much easier than before is not much more popular than before.
  - coffeefirst 1y ago
    And the bookie was a guy you’d call up, shoot the shit, and he was basically everyone’s buddy. There were inherent constraints. He could not advertise. He could not send you push notifications or run AB tests on millions of users.
  - decimalenough 1y ago
    And I'm not claiming that, but I also don't think the amount actually gambled has increased by 30x, as the headline $5B to $150B figures imply.
- dastbe 1y ago
  I was interested in this, so perusing I found https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/2.pdf https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/2.pdf which estimates in the late 90s "Estimates of the scope of illegal sports betting in the United States range anywhere from $80 billion to $380 billion annually, making sports betting the most widespread and popular form of gambling in America." which seems surprising even at the low end. similarly from https://www.americangaming.org/new-aga-report-shows-americans-gamble-more-than-half-a-trillion-dollars-illegally-each-year/ https://www.americangaming.org/new-aga-report-shows-american... in 2022 "AGA’s report estimates that Americans wager $63.8 billion with illegal bookies and offshore sites at a cost of $3.8 billion in gaming revenue and $700 million in state taxes. With Americans projected to place $100 billion in legal sports bets this year, these findings imply that illegal sportsbook operators are capturing nearly 40 percent of the U.S. sports betting market." I think what would be more interesting to me is estimates on the unique number of citizens betting. Is it up? If so, how appreciably?
defrost 1y ago
All the downsides of a crack epidemic without having to source any drugs.
tdeck 1y ago
I remember walking into Powell station in the mid 2010s and the whole thing was plastered top to bottom in DraftKings ads and wondering "why is this allowed". It was like a switch flipped and suddenly gambling was being advertised everywhere.
zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago
Why make it illegal or regulate it? So what if half of men have gambled on sports? How many people throw away money on casino games, lotteries, raffles, loot boxes, et cetera? It's not my business how they throw away their money.
- mc3301 1y ago
  It's kinda bad for society if a bunch of, let's say, middle class men become economically lower-class men while the upper-class owners of such gambling establishments rake it in. We as a society should get to decide what "freedoms" and what "constraints" make for a better society as a whole, don't we?
- IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
  Its for the same reason you don't give a license to someone with a DUI. They are a harm to others. People with gambling addictions don't just hurt themselves - they hurt families, friends, and also the society at large as they come to be dependent on the safety net for substeance. I think you dont need to make it illegal to keep it in check. A simple rule saying: IF a person spends more than 20% of the overall W2 or 1099 income on gambling, then the gambling house is liable for every 95 cents of every subsequent dollar paid out. We transfer liability for selling alcohol to irresponsible bartenders - casinos should also take the heat for the malaise they inflict. You'd see very quickly how things get real.
  - azemetre 1y ago
    Could you explain more what you mean? Like after 20% of someone's W2, the gambling house pays out 95/100 times? Trying to understand how this regulation works, I'm intrigued by the idea of progressive levels of taxation against industries but I don't know if this is what you're arguing.
    - IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
      No, its a shift in liability. Simply put, if a gambler shows up in court with a W2 and payouts to a gambling house, they get summary judgement against the house. This works well because once codified ("no gambler shall owe more than 20% of their annual income to any gambling house, individually or in the aggregate") it triggers an unrecorded liability on the gambling house's clientele. In other words, the stock becomes radioactive , unless the gambling house has strong controls around client onboarding and monitoring. Auditors are never going to sign off on financials that have a huge liability unless it is proven there are strict controls in place to not let degenerate gambling continue. The same principle could be applied to universities as well. Basically, you have to shift the risk to the party abusing the system (in this case, not the system, but the addiction).
yieldcrv 1y ago
> style argument would be forced under penalty of law to write the above quote 300 times on a chalkboard as initiation to your startup accelerator?
- giahug 1y ago
  [flagged]
bdangubic 1y ago
wait till people find out that if you are actually great at gambling you will 100% be banned from all of these platforms
- snowwrestler 1y ago
  I find this really irritating, it’s not just that sports gambling is legal, it’s also legal for sports gambling companies to limit their customer base to only the people who are bad at it. It seems totally unbalanced, predatory, like an overt scam. I would feel a lot better about the law permitting sports gambling if it also required companies to accept bets from all gamblers. It likely would reduce margins and feel a lot riskier to the companies. Like with poker… you can’t sit down at the table hoping to win big without also risking to lose big.
  - bdangubic 1y ago
    just like politicans LOVE choosing their voters through gerrimandering the legal booms LOVE choosing their customers. pay off some of these politicians and you got a sweet deal…
- Ferret7446 1y ago
  This makes no sense at all. You shouldn't be gambling against the platform, you should be gambling against other users. The platform profits equally whether you win or lose, since they take a cut per bet, not per loss
  - bdangubic 1y ago
    makes no sense but it is common practice across all platforms
  - pbmonster 1y ago
    Poker has the same problem. The casino wants people to keep playing for as long as possible, so they can keep raking in ante/commission. People play longest if they win and lose almost equal amounts. Having a high skill player at a table/bookie breaks this cycle. People start losing faster, and end up playing less. The high skill player continuously drains money from the table, money that would have been bet again in a later bet if it had gone to an average player. Can't have that.
philistine 1y ago
When you think about it, ads for those betting sites is basically what's powering what's left of growth in the ad market.

decimalenough 1y ago

While I have no doubt sports betting is much more popular now, I presume the $5 billion figure does not capture the considerable amount of illegal betting that happened previously.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jgalt212 1y ago
If you wanted to bet on sports when I was in college you needed a bookie. Now, you have access to all the legal bookies in the world in your pocket. It's hard to make an argument that something that is now legal and much easier than before is not much more popular than before.
- coffeefirst 1y ago
  And the bookie was a guy you’d call up, shoot the shit, and he was basically everyone’s buddy. There were inherent constraints. He could not advertise. He could not send you push notifications or run AB tests on millions of users.
- decimalenough 1y ago
  And I'm not claiming that, but I also don't think the amount actually gambled has increased by 30x, as the headline $5B to $150B figures imply.
dastbe 1y ago
I was interested in this, so perusing I found https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/2.pdf https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/2.pdf which estimates in the late 90s "Estimates of the scope of illegal sports betting in the United States range anywhere from $80 billion to $380 billion annually, making sports betting the most widespread and popular form of gambling in America." which seems surprising even at the low end. similarly from https://www.americangaming.org/new-aga-report-shows-americans-gamble-more-than-half-a-trillion-dollars-illegally-each-year/ https://www.americangaming.org/new-aga-report-shows-american... in 2022 "AGA’s report estimates that Americans wager $63.8 billion with illegal bookies and offshore sites at a cost of $3.8 billion in gaming revenue and $700 million in state taxes. With Americans projected to place $100 billion in legal sports bets this year, these findings imply that illegal sportsbook operators are capturing nearly 40 percent of the U.S. sports betting market." I think what would be more interesting to me is estimates on the unique number of citizens betting. Is it up? If so, how appreciably?

defrost 1y ago

All the downsides of a crack epidemic without having to source any drugs.

tdeck 1y ago

I remember walking into Powell station in the mid 2010s and the whole thing was plastered top to bottom in DraftKings ads and wondering "why is this allowed". It was like a switch flipped and suddenly gambling was being advertised everywhere.

zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago

Why make it illegal or regulate it? So what if half of men have gambled on sports? How many people throw away money on casino games, lotteries, raffles, loot boxes, et cetera? It's not my business how they throw away their money.

mc3301 1y ago
It's kinda bad for society if a bunch of, let's say, middle class men become economically lower-class men while the upper-class owners of such gambling establishments rake it in. We as a society should get to decide what "freedoms" and what "constraints" make for a better society as a whole, don't we?
IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
Its for the same reason you don't give a license to someone with a DUI. They are a harm to others. People with gambling addictions don't just hurt themselves - they hurt families, friends, and also the society at large as they come to be dependent on the safety net for substeance. I think you dont need to make it illegal to keep it in check. A simple rule saying: IF a person spends more than 20% of the overall W2 or 1099 income on gambling, then the gambling house is liable for every 95 cents of every subsequent dollar paid out. We transfer liability for selling alcohol to irresponsible bartenders - casinos should also take the heat for the malaise they inflict. You'd see very quickly how things get real.
- azemetre 1y ago
  Could you explain more what you mean? Like after 20% of someone's W2, the gambling house pays out 95/100 times? Trying to understand how this regulation works, I'm intrigued by the idea of progressive levels of taxation against industries but I don't know if this is what you're arguing.
  - IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
    No, its a shift in liability. Simply put, if a gambler shows up in court with a W2 and payouts to a gambling house, they get summary judgement against the house. This works well because once codified ("no gambler shall owe more than 20% of their annual income to any gambling house, individually or in the aggregate") it triggers an unrecorded liability on the gambling house's clientele. In other words, the stock becomes radioactive , unless the gambling house has strong controls around client onboarding and monitoring. Auditors are never going to sign off on financials that have a huge liability unless it is proven there are strict controls in place to not let degenerate gambling continue. The same principle could be applied to universities as well. Basically, you have to shift the risk to the party abusing the system (in this case, not the system, but the addiction).

yieldcrv 1y ago

> style argument would be forced under penalty of law to write the above quote 300 times on a chalkboard as initiation to your startup accelerator?

giahug 1y ago
[flagged]

bdangubic 1y ago

wait till people find out that if you are actually great at gambling you will 100% be banned from all of these platforms

snowwrestler 1y ago
I find this really irritating, it’s not just that sports gambling is legal, it’s also legal for sports gambling companies to limit their customer base to only the people who are bad at it. It seems totally unbalanced, predatory, like an overt scam. I would feel a lot better about the law permitting sports gambling if it also required companies to accept bets from all gamblers. It likely would reduce margins and feel a lot riskier to the companies. Like with poker… you can’t sit down at the table hoping to win big without also risking to lose big.
- bdangubic 1y ago
  just like politicans LOVE choosing their voters through gerrimandering the legal booms LOVE choosing their customers. pay off some of these politicians and you got a sweet deal…
Ferret7446 1y ago
This makes no sense at all. You shouldn't be gambling against the platform, you should be gambling against other users. The platform profits equally whether you win or lose, since they take a cut per bet, not per loss
- bdangubic 1y ago
  makes no sense but it is common practice across all platforms
- pbmonster 1y ago
  Poker has the same problem. The casino wants people to keep playing for as long as possible, so they can keep raking in ante/commission. People play longest if they win and lose almost equal amounts. Having a high skill player at a table/bookie breaks this cycle. People start losing faster, and end up playing less. The high skill player continuously drains money from the table, money that would have been bet again in a later bet if it had gone to an average player. Can't have that.

philistine 1y ago

When you think about it, ads for those betting sites is basically what's powering what's left of growth in the ad market.